AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
C.S.Dias, J
The original petition is filed to direct the Court of Additional District Judge-IV, Kottayam (Appellate Court) to consider and dispose of I.A. No.2/2022 (Ext.P14) in CMA No.56/2022 (Ext.P12) and I.A. No.1/2022 (Ext.P15) in CMA No.57/2022(Ext.P13), within a time frame.
The petitioner is the third defendant in O.S.No.47/2019 on the file of the Court of the Munsiff, Kottayam, (Trial Court), which was filed by the respondents 1 and 2. The respondents 3 to 5 are the Trustee, President and Chief Metropolitan, respectively of the petitioner and the defendants 1,2 and 4 in the suit.
The Trial Court, by Ext.P11 order, passed an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the petitioner from taking any policy decision regarding the financial and administrative matters, until a newly elected association comes into force.
Assailing Ext.P11 order, the petitioner has filed Exts.P12 and P13 appeals. Along with the appeals, the petitioner has also filed Exts.P14 and P15 applications to stay the operation of Ext.P11 order.
In fact, the Trial Court, has by itself kept the operation of Ext.P11 order in abeyance till 29.08.2022 (today). Even though the appeals were filed before the District Court, Kottayam within time, the same have been made over to the Court of the District Judge-IV, Kottayam. The learned District Judge, before whom the case has been made over, was indisposed and Exts.P14 and P15 were not considered. The validity of Ext.P11 stay order will expire today. Hence, the Appellate Court may be directed to consider and dispose of Exts.P14 and P15 within a time frame, until such time Ext.P11 may be kept in abeyance, failing which the petitioner would be put to irreparable loss and hardship. Hence, the original petition.
Heard; Smt. Sumathi Dandapani, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Joseph Kodianthara, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.
On a consideration of the pleadings and materials on record, particularly, the fact that the petitioner has already challenged Ext.P11 order by preferring Ext.P12 and P13 appeals before the Appellate Courts, and has with the appeal filed Ext.P14 and P15 applications to stay the operation of impugned Ext.P11 order, and further the Trial Court itself has kept in abeyance the operation of Ext.P11 till today, I am of the definite view that the validity of the stay order has to be extended till a decision is taken on Exts.P14 and P15, which would do complete justice to the parties.
In the result, in exercise of the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, I direct the Court of the Additional District Judge-IV, Kottayam, to consider and dispose of Exts.P14 and P15 applications, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, on or before 03.09.2022. Until such time, the orders are passed on the above applications, the operation of Ext.P11 order shall be kept in abeyance.
The original petition is ordered accordingly.
Hand over.